Posted on 05/07/2007 10:42:12 AM PDT by NYer
On May 9 and 16, PBS will air a four-part docudrama called “The Secret Files of the Inquisition.” Catholic League president Bill Donohue raised some concerns today:
“PBS will not air a movie that its officials say paints Muslims in a bad light, ‘Islam vs. Islamists,’ but it has no qualms about showing a flick that Catholics have every right to question. This film is advertised on PBS’s website with an eerie black background depicting all the ‘T’s’ as crosses. All that is missing is Dracula’s voiceover. ‘For over half a millennium a system of mass terror reigned,’ it says, and ‘Thousands were subject to secret courts, torture and punishment.’ This is plainly dishonest.
“As British historian Henry Kamen has shown in his magisterial work, The Spanish Inquisition: A Historical Revision, almost all the conventional wisdom about the Inquisition is wrong. By comparison with secular courts at the time, the Inquisition’s methods were more humane, e.g., defendants could be represented by an attorney. Edward Peters, another student of the period, says, ‘Modern historiography has completely blown the old Inquisition propaganda out of the water. No one seriously contends that hundreds of thousands or millions were killed, or that the Protestant countries were any more humane than Spain was.’ Indeed, scholars today refer to the old school mythology as ‘the Black Legend,’ a tale of lies spun by Elizabethan England. No wonder that in 1994, BBC/A&E aired ‘The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition.’
“Here’s what we know. Of the approximately 125,000 cases tried by the Spanish Inquisition, 1 percent resulted in the death penalty. Of the so-called witch hunts, where women were burned at the stake, secular courts executed 50,000 (not all of whom were women); less than 100 were killed by the Inquisition. Solzhenitsyn once compared the killings that took place in the Soviet Union in 1937 and 1938 to the killings that took place during the Spanish Inquisition and found that 20,000 were killed per month in the U.S.S.R. and 10 were killed per month during the Inquisition. But don’t look for such comparisons on PBS. To do so might get in the way of the truth.”
Much of the historical truth of the era of the “all powerful” Vatican has been whitewashed. The cold cruelty and sadistic torture inflicted against non-catholics for centuries by this “church” is unparalleled.
However, the idea that PBS will give an historically accurate representation is laughable. Their goal is to destroy all of christendom. I am sure they will distort every aspect; their real goal being the undermining of everything Christian.
Make no mistake, neither catholic or protestant will be shown in a positive light. Their unspoken agenda will be to promote the state religion of secular humanism, and inflict as much damage to christianity as possible.
You're posting this to a thread about a theme and a program that contradicts your post.
Now let's look at the facts.
The Myth of the Spanish Inquisitionby Ellen Rice
"The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition," a 1994 BBC/A&E production, will re-air on the History Channel this December 3 at 10 p.m. It is a definite must-see for anyone who wishes to know how historians now evaluate the Spanish Inquisition since the opening of an investigation into the Inquisition's archives. The special includes commentary from historians whose studies verify that the tale of the darkest hour of the Church was greatly fabricated.
In its brief sixty-minute presentation, "The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition" provides only an overview of the origins and debunking of the myths of torture and genocide. The documentary definitely succeeds in leaving the viewer hungry to know more. The long-held beliefs of the audience are sufficiently weakened by the testimony of experts and the expose of the making of the myth.
The Inquisition began in 1480. Spain was beginning a historic reunification of Aragon and Castile. The marriage of Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of Castile created a unified Hispania not seen since Roman times. Afraid that laws commanding the exile or conversion of Jews were thwarted by conversos, i.e. synagogue-going "Catholics," Ferdinand and Isabella commissioned an investigation or Inquisition. They began the Inquisition hoping that religious unity would foster political unity, and other heads of state heralded Spain's labors for the advent of a unified Christendom. The documentary clearly and boldly narrates the historical context, which intimates that the Spanish were not acting odd by their contemporary standards.
The Inquisition Myth, which Spaniards call "The Black Legend," did not arise in 1480. It began almost 100 years later, and exactly one year after the Protestant defeat at the Battle of Mühlberg at the hands of Ferdinand's grandson, the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V. In 1567 a fierce propaganda campaign began with the publication of a Protestant leaflet penned by a supposed Inquisition victim named Montanus. This character (Protestant of course) painted Spaniards as barbarians who ravished women and sodomized young boys. The propagandists soon created "hooded fiends" who tortured their victims in horrible devices like the knife-filled Iron Maiden (which never was used in Spain). The BBC/A&E special plainly states a reason for the war of words: the Protestants fought with words because they could not win on the battlefield.
The Inquisition had a secular character, although the crime was heresy. Inquisitors did not have to be clerics, but they did have to be lawyers. The investigation was rule-based and carefully kept in check. And most significantly, historians have declared fraudulent a supposed Inquisition document claiming the genocide of millions of heretics.
What is documented is that 3000 to 5000 people died during the Inquisition's 350 year history. Also documented are the "Acts of Faith," public sentencings of heretics in town squares. But the grand myth of thought control by sinister fiends has been debunked by the archival evidence. The inquisitors enjoyed a powerful position in the towns, but it was one constantly jostled by other power brokers. In the outlying areas, they were understaffed - in those days it was nearly impossible for 1 or 2 inquisitors to cover the thousand-mile territory allotted to each team. In the outlying areas no one cared and no one spoke to them. As the program documents, the 3,000 to 5,000 documented executions of the Inquisition pale in comparison to the 150,000 documented witch burnings elsewhere in Europe over the same centuries.
The approach is purely historical, and therefore does not delve into ecclesial issues surrounding religious freedom. But perhaps this is proper. Because the crime was heresy, the Church is implicated, but the facts show it was a secular event.
One facet of the Black Legend that evaporates under scrutiny in this film is the rumor that Philip II, son of Charles V, killed his son Don Carlos on the advisement of the aging blind Grand Inquisitor. But without a shred of evidence, the legend of Don Carlos has been enshrined in a glorious opera by Verdi.
The special may be disturbing to young children. There are scenes of poor souls burning at the stake, and close-ups of the alleged torture devices. Scenes depicting witches consorting with pot-bellied devils are especially grotesque. For kids, this is the stuff of nightmares.
Discrediting the Black Legend brings up the sticky subject of revisionism. Re-investigating history is only invalid if it puts an agenda ahead of reality. The experts - once true believers in the Inquisition myth - were not out to do a feminist canonization of Isabella or claim that Tomas de Torquemada was a Marxist. Henry Kamen of the Higher Council for Scientific Research in Barcelona said on camera that researching the Inquisition's archives "demolished the previous image all of us (historians) had."
And the future of the Black Legend? For many it may continue to hold more weight than reality. There is the emotional appeal against the Church. The dissenters of today may easily imagine Torquemada's beady eyes as a metaphor of the Church's "dictatorial, controlling, damning" pronouncements. The myth is also the easiest endorsement of the secular state: "de-faith" the state and de-criminalize heresy. Who will be the revisionists in this case? Will the many follow Montanas' lead in rewriting history?
Our 20th century crisis of man playing God - usurping power over conception, life, and death - leaves us with no alternative but to qualify our demythologization of the Inquisition with a reminder: 3,000 to 5,000 victims are 3,000 to 5,000 too many.
Do you have any evidence, or do you "just know"? (See The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition).
OH I’ve seen your “evidence” before. The RCC was a benevolent, hymn-singing, bingo sponsor. They never did nuttin’ ta no one.
Yeah, that line is par with the holocaust denying.
Huh?
As I suspected, you have no evidence.
OTOH, a group of secular historians, who by their own admission began their investigation assuming the veracity of the "black legend," changed their opinion after examining the documentary evidence.
Were these bad acts committed by the Protestant churches or were they committed by governments after passing laws outlawing the Roman Catholic Church? You’re not counting the actions of unruly mobs or over enthusiastic individuals acting on their own, are you?
My ancestor “witches” were convicted by a secular court.
You wrote:
“Were these bad acts committed by the Protestant churches or were they committed by governments after passing laws outlawing the Roman Catholic Church?”
There was almost no difference between the two since the Protestant sects were created by, owned by, run by, and funded by the state.
“You’re not counting the actions of unruly mobs or over enthusiastic individuals acting on their own, are you?”
Nope.
“My ancestor “witches” were convicted by a secular court.”
That might be.
Tell it to the Hugonauts.
I'll remember that when I see the claims made by the Roman catholic Church that most of the deaths of the Inquisition took place after convictions in secular courts (under control of Catholic Monarchs).
You wrote: “I’ll remember that when I see the claims made by the Roman catholic Church that most of the deaths of the Inquisition took place after convictions in secular courts (under control of Catholic Monarchs).”
I’m glad you’ll remember that because then you’ll always know that the situation in Catholic states was often radically different. In no Catholic country was the Church controlled by the state nor was the state controlled by the Church. This is why there was tension between the two constantly unlike in Protestant countries where the first steps toward totalitarianism took place.
Also, the Catholic Church makes no claims at all about how deaths after inquisition trials or even secular courts took place. It would help if you knew what you were talking about.
The hands of the Church are clean with the Huguenots, cuz they were persecuted by the state, not the Church.... less we're gonna go by vladimir998's standard.
“From what I understand, the various inquisitions were not started under order from the Vatican, rather, it was the heads of states suppressing dissent under the guise protecting the state religion.”
exactly - people were accused of treason against their government.
Thus occurred the odious Massacre of St. Bartholomew, so called from the saint whose feast fell on the same day (24 August, 1572), Admiral Coligny being slain with many of his Huguenot followers. The massacre spread to many provincial towns. The number of victims is estimated at 2000 for the capital, and 6000 to 8000 for the rest of France. The king explained to foreign courts that Coligny and his partisans had organized a plot against his person and authority, and that he (the king) had merely suppressed it. Thus it was that Pope Gregory XIII at first believed in a conspiracy of the Huguenots, and, persuaded that the king had but defended himself against these heretics, held a service of thanksgiving for the repression of the conspiracy, and commemorated it by having a medal struck, which he sent with his felicitations to Charles IX. There is no proof that the Catholic clergy were in the slightest degree connected with the massacre.Even Wikipedia doesn't mention Church sanction of Huguenot massacres.Huguenots
1917 Catholic Encyclopedia
A very important point, Henry VIII and Calvin's Geneva being the examples par excellence.
In the thought of Calvin, state and church were distinct, but each in its proper sphere was to cooperate with the other in their great common purpose: to serve and glorify God. By the end of his career he had achieved a complete dominance of Geneva, which makes it possible for us to see what his full program was. All inhabitants had to renounce the Roman faith on penalty of expulsion from the city. Nobody could possess images, crucifixes or other articles associated with the Roman worship. Fasting was prohibited, together with vows, pilgrimages, prayers for the dead, and prayers in Latin. Nobody could say anything good about the pope. It was forbidden to give non-Biblical names to children. In 1555, a man who had been found lighting a candle before the body of his dead child was called before the Consistory. Attendance at sermons was compulsory. In addition, one had to arrive on time, remain, and pay attention. In 1547, a man who left during the sermon and made too much noise about it was imprisoned. From 1545, there were domiciliary visits, which were put on a regular semiannual basis in 1550. The homes of the citizens were visited in order to ascertain the state of the family's morals. A great many spies were maintained, to report on matters of conduct and behavior. Dramatic performances were suppressed, except for plays given by schoolboys. Sexual immorality was frequently practiced and frequently chastised. One of the offenses considered particularly serious was criticism of the ministers and especially Calvin.
Just wanted to let you know that I find your posts very informative. Rather than just slinging around various inflammatory comments, you engage posters in well-reasoned, rational debate. You back up your claims with facts, and you show little evidence of bias.
If you were a Protestant living in a Catholic state during the Reformation, I'm sure you'd see that "totalitarian" question differently. If you believed any of the earlier heresies & had the Church offer up all of your stuff to any prince willing to deal with you, you might see that "totalitarian" question differently too. Think there could have been a Holy Roman Empire if the Church hadn't dabbled in the affairs of men?
Despite the Monarchs' & Church's differences, they often worked together.
Also, the Catholic Church makes no claims at all about how deaths after inquisition trials or even secular courts took place. It would help if you knew what you were talking about.
The Church has been pretty vocal about "correcting" the history.
Right, because they were persecuted for the treasonous act of committing heresy. It was a crime against the state. Protestant rulers made the same error, but they sure didn't create it out of whole-cloth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.